Posted on 07/21/2006 4:52:46 AM PDT by fanfan
Traditionally, at this point in her response to terror attacks, the world diplomatic community persuades Israel to agree a ceasefire, and the terrorists are saved to fight another day. This is what happened in 1982. The Israelis were in a position to annihilate Yasser Arafat's PLO, whom they had surrounded in Beirut. Instead, they agreed to let them escape to Tunisia. The rest is history: recurring again and again.
Kofi Annan is trying to do the same thing over: to save Hezbollah (this time) with a ceasefire, by promising Israel that a large force of international "peacekeepers" will take their place. But a U.N. force is no likelier to disarm Hezbollah than the Lebanese army was (when Lebanon agreed to disarm Hezbollah, most recently in 2004). After a brief lull in the shooting, and a chance to regroup and rebuild, Hezbollah would be back at Israel's throat.
The Israelis know this, now, from hard experience. There is overwhelming popular support for the course Prime Minister Olmert has set out. The Israelis will not be taking advice, from such as Russia and France. The Americans, even the State Department under Condoleezza Rice, show signs of having seriously absorbed their own lessons from recent history. John Bolton is sitting squarely in the Security Council, prepared to veto every effort to force the Israelis to desist. This time -- with or without the world's permission -- the Israelis are going to finish the job.
This is evident from events in Lebanon, through the last week. The Israeli air force has been doing classic battlefield prep, along the lines of the allied Operation Hail Mary against the Iraqis occupying Kuwait in 1991. You will recall Gen. Colin Powell's memorable phrase: "First we're going to cut them off, then we're going to kill them." The Israeli air strikes on Lebanese airports, harbours, roads and bridges is the "cut them off" part. The "kill them" part is coming.
There have been four call-ups of Israeli reserves. This is never done for show in Israel. Reserves are systematically replacing regulars in West Bank positions; regulars from there and elsewhere are assembling for the trudge north.
It will not be a walkover, as the Israelis know. They will take plenty of casualties. Hezbollah have had years to dig in deep, and the Iranians and Syrians have been very generous in arming and training them. The Israeli command is aware of at least 600 underground missile caches, each one of which will be well-defended. Nearly 200 of those contain missiles capable of hitting Tel Aviv.
The air strikes have only been able to hit launching pads at surface level. The array of Hezbollah anti-tank defences just inside Lebanon's southern border is formidable. The Israelis won't be crossing it for small stakes. Some time in the next few days, the serious fighting will begin.
That none of Hezbollah's longest-range missiles have been used yet (despite Hezbollah boasts and threats), is an indication that Iranian permission is not forthcoming. For the use of such powerful Iranian ordnance against Israeli population centres, even if shot from Lebanese territory, would bring Israeli retaliation against Iran itself. And it is fairly clear from the diplomatic gestures they have been making, and the purely defensive postures the Syrian military has been assuming, that both countries want out of the line of fire.
My sense is that the ayatollahs are already resigning themselves to the loss of Hezbollah, and don't wish to lose Syria, too. The Israeli air force alone is capable of triggering a regime change in Damascus, by decapitating Syria's Alawite leadership. Moreover, an Iran that itself attacks Israel is -- I should think in the certain knowledge of its leaders -- an Iran that will be attacked by the United States.
And so, to the long-term (though obviously not the short-term) benefit of Lebanon, the war will be confined to Lebanon (and Gaza). The long-term benefit is that Hezbollah prevents the emergence of a Lebanon free of Syrian interference, and therefore of Israeli threats. Even some of the Shia realize that Lebanon would be better off, without a private militia much larger than the country's armed forces. Lebanon has a prosperous future in alliance with Israel and the United States. It has no other prosperous future. The idea appears to be seeping into the Lebanese ruling classes. Even the once radical Druze leader, Walid Jumblatt, seems to get this.
For Israel, there is no turning back. It is a categorical imperative: for if the Israeli military isn't facing Hezbollah and Hamas, then Israel's civilians have to face them.
In a strange way, perhaps a way he anticipated, Ariel Sharon's bold decision to remove the Jewish settlements from Gaza, and turn the territory over to Palestinian self-government, clinched the issue. If the subsequent rocket attacks from Gaza, then Lebanon, could be predicted by me, they would have been predicted by him.
Israeli Soldiers and tanks at the Lebanon border now.
Yup. Now is the right time. I hope Israel can end this once and for all. If the UN tries to stop them, we threaten to pull out and send their butts to Europe and make the UN bvuilding the new Israel Embassy.
Israeli Soldiers and tanks at the Lebanon border now.
This is one front in the WoT, the most important one at the moment. The chief instigators and terrorist enablers, Iran and Syria, will need to be dealt with before long.
Good one! I like that.
Israel deserves it. Of course every Arab in America will protest.
Israel told Lebanese civilians to leave border towns and the Lebanese army is vowing to resist what they refer to as an invasion:
"Lebanese army to resist any invasion: minister"
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-07-21T123123Z_01_L21850529_RTRUKOT_0_TEXT0.xml&WTmodLoc=NewsArt-L1-RelatedNews-3
Sounds like this will escalate now.
Iran and Syria will be watching closely. If ISrael rids the wortld of Hezbollah, Lebanon will be an Israel ally. I htink Israel should go in and overthrow the current regime in Syria as well. Iran will be the lone bad guy standing and I think that country is ripe for revolution.
But things will get a lot uglier before we see any good come of this. And if you believe in the Bible, they will again get worse.
This is an amusing statement considering that they're alrady occupied by a foreign militia, which met no resistance whatsoever. It would be laughable if things were not so serious at this point.
http://www.jnewswire.com/article/994
"Iran planning to strike Israel?"
Iran is just sitting back at the moment and pulling the strings of Hesballah, will they enter the fray?
"The Azadegan Foundation, led by former Iranian diplomat Assad Homayoun, warned that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad intends to use weapons of mass destruction against the Jewish state."
Agree with you on Syria and Iran. Force regime change in the former and totally isolate the latter to encourage regime change. If something is not done about Iran soon, they are going to destabilize the entire region.
That's the big question. This might be a little bit of a conundrum for them. If they openly join the attack, they are inviting serious retaliation if not annihilation. If they opt not to play an 'active' role it might appear to be backing away from supporting Hesballah, in which case they risk losing face.
If only State, the MSM, Big business which loves Arab oil, will allow the USA to just do nothing as Israel finishes these bugs off.
I agree.
Yup, this is way overdue, and because it is so overdue it will be that much harder. Israel will prevail and heavy losses on both sides will occur. Hopefully the Lebanese army, despite its threats, will stay out of it. If they are smart they will sit back and wait, and then Lebanon will be sovereign again. If they are dumb and get involved they will be crushed and set way back, leaving a power vacuum to fill.
This was a good article.
Folks, please put me on your ping lists, all of you. Thank you.
Ariel Sharon played the moslems like Hendrix played a guitar.
There are those who would make a defeat of our victory. They are not all living in foreign countries.
Reminds me of the Military Oath. "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."
An oath is forever.
You are probably right about Sharon. He was born in the Palestine Mandate, fought for Israeli independence and led armies against the Arab forces and irregulars all his life. There was probably nobody better than he who knew the circumstances, the repercussions of actions, etc.
There is so little in our western public debate about Arab thought, Arab tactics, Arab aspirations and Arab fears. What discourse we do have is all so cliche ridden. "Occupation", "settlements", "collective punishment", etc, etc. But there are actually very real emotions, very real tactics. There are many who said Sharon was a bad strategist and a good tactician. Maybe they were right, or maybe becoming a good strategist takes wisdom of experience.
I think you are right. Sharon's moves were brilliant strategy. He has divided the Palestinians into three camps, each comingled on three separate pieces of land. Unifying their ideology is hard enough. Unifying them as a people may prove to be impossible. There is just no way the people of the West Bank will want to comingle with the people of Gaza, or the people living in camps in Lebanon, for so many ideological and sociological and economic reasons. I believe Sharon knew this better than anyone. He called the Palestinians' bluff, which is why their leaders hate the idea of unilateral withdrawals... it forces them to face their own monsters, their own divisions, their own fears and their own myths.
And now, Lebanon has to face their monsters too.
There is no better proof of the Palestinians' inability to unify than their rejection of President Clinton's offer. They were offered virtually everything they said they wanted, plus $30 billion in aid, but turned it down. Why? It's not such a mystery. In part its because they knew they could not unify, and in part its because they never really wanted to compromise to begin with.
Now that their bluff has been called, it's check mate in 3 moves, I think. There will be bloodshed, but as far as this is concerned it might as well be over. The Arabists are contained and the Islamists are about to be wiped out. Syria and Iran remain the last holdouts. With Iran out of the picture, Syria will capitulate. I think there will be no attack on Syria, it will be left to stew on the loss of every ally and every vassel it ever had, one by one by one until there is nothing left for them but reform.
Iran remains the strategic threat, and the western countries are not interfering with Israel's actions against Hezbullah because they know that before they can seriously address the Iranian nuclear problem first the Iranians' ability to distract and divert (in Lebanon and in Iraq) must be taken away from them.
Bush has 2 1/2 years left. He will leave, maybe unpopular, but over time will have earned himself a spot near the top of the list of greatest Presidents ever.
It is interesting that you come to the same view of reality as I by a path so different from mine. Perhaps we may sojourn on together.
I suspect that our President may be one of the greatest of all the Great Captains. I have doubts, at times, and then suddenly the vision clears. The last few days have been that way for me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.